The predictive value of baseline variables in the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia using high‐energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the combination of patient age,Results Nomograms are presented providing the estimated probability (95% confidence interval) for a prostate size, grade of outlet obstruction and total amount of energy, all independent predictive variables good/ 50% [3,4]. These objective and subjective improvements

Tolerability of 3.5 versus 2.5 High–Energy Transurethral Microwave Thermotherapy

“…This energy is essential for obtaining an optimal treatment outcome. We know from earlier studies that the treatment outcome is partially dependent on the total energy administered during treatment [19]. However, no significant relation is seen between pain and total energy delivered during the TUMT 2.5 treatment.…”

Nonablative minimally invasive thermal therapies in the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia

“…Although outflow-obstruction is not an inclusion criterion, patients with a higher degree of outflow-obstruction and patients with a high IPSS score at baseline are better responders to the therapy [17][18][19]. A large protruding prostate middle lobe is contraindicated, but limits towards maximum prostate for treatment are not yet set.…”

“…Also the grade of urodynamically proved obstruction is a predictive factor. As age is also a predictive factor for symptomatic response after TUMT [19] one would expect the patients with higher co-morbidity to perform less. Even in patients with a high co-morbidity (ASA classification III), however, treatment results were good [29].…”

Application of External Microwave Thermotherapy in Urology: Past, Present, and Future

“…A prediction of good response was possible in 78% of patients using the grade of BOO, 72% using Q max , and 97% using the IPSS. 23 The total amount of energy appears to be the most useful for prediction of a good and poor response for all evaluation criteria. However, the applied energy or power alone cannot predict the clinical outcome.…”